From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Rodosta

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit
Oct 11, 1983
438 So. 2d 1165 (La. Ct. App. 1983)

Opinion

No. 83 KM 0767-68.

October 11, 1983.

APPEAL FROM EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF IBERVILLE, STATE OF LOUISIANA, HONORABLE CATHERINE D. KIMBALL, JUDGE PRESIDING.

Before LOTTINGER, EDWARDS and ALFORD, JJ.


During the pendency of the appeals lodged in this Court, defendants re-urged their motion for a new trial. The previous motion for a new trial was denied after a hearing by the trial court. The instant motion has been timely filed based upon allegations of new and material evidence that, notwithstanding the exercise of reasonable diligence by the defendants, was not discovered before or during the trial, which evidence if available, allegedly would probably have changed the verdict of guilty. La. Code Crim.P. Art. 851.

On July 7, 1983, this court issued a Show Cause Order as to why these appeals should not be remanded for a new trial hearing. No response has been made by the State, and thus we must assume the defendants' motion is not opposed.

Therefore, we remand these cases to the trial court for a hearing on defendants' motion for a new trial. La. Code Crim.P. Art. 853. State v. Spell, 388 So.2d 754 (La. 1980).

REMANDED TO DISTRICT COURT.


Summaries of

State v. Rodosta

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit
Oct 11, 1983
438 So. 2d 1165 (La. Ct. App. 1983)
Case details for

State v. Rodosta

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF LOUISIANA v. JOSEPH Z. RODOSTA. STATE OF LOUISIANA v. KARL J…

Court:Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit

Date published: Oct 11, 1983

Citations

438 So. 2d 1165 (La. Ct. App. 1983)